TurkoTek Discussion Boards

Subject  :  Let's talk about
Author  :  Vincent Keers mailto:%20vkeers@worldonline.nl
Date  :  04-20-2001 on 11:18 a.m.
2 rugs.

Dear all,

Here are 2 backsides.
One is in the corner "New copies"
The other in the corner "Old glory"

I'm doing this, before anyone els does this and I flip out again, again, again....again?
Looking at the 2 rug-backs from a "normal person" perspective, I couldn't tell anything.
Looking from a "harmless but has to be helped once and a while" person perspective, I had to be hospitalized. Some great Nurses in the hospital. They keep on singing this song: "Let's talk about rags.......you and me....."
Do you know the song?
Whatever, I'm having a great time here and the brain surgeon says he can help me.
So...what to worry?

Best regards,
Vincent


Subject  :  Re:Let's talk about
Author  :  R. John Howe mailto:%20rjhowe@erols.com
Date  :  04-20-2001 on 03:41 p.m.
Vincent -

Thanks for doing this. I was hoping some of us would begin to put up some backs so we can test what we see.

I think the actual weave patterns are pretty similar in these two pieces but I would vote for the one on the right being older than the one on the left primarily because I can see a lot of "hairs" on the back of the left piece.

This is something that all new pieces have (unless they've been pretty thoroughly "blow-torched" to remove them, something that does happen).

This may not be strictly speaking a species of weave pattern but it is close to Neff and Maggs' description of the gestalt of the Ersari weave pattern as "fibrous."

Regards,

R. John Howe


Subject  :  Re:Let's talk about
Author  :  Vincent mailto:%20vkeers@worldonline.nl
Date  :  04-20-2001 on 07:57 p.m.
Dear John,

I'm so very predictabel. The more bizar, the easier I step in...open-eyed.
The nurses here, keep telling me: "Vincent....You're an open book. The only thing that's on your mind is...rags" At least, that's what I think they are saying, singing and sometimes..it whispers in my ear.

Hope some other participents can find time to have a guess. My Afghan dog "Tekke" (ooh how original.....) had it right because she looks for the rug that's best smelling.

In between the rugs there's a 3000 km's distance.

Best regards,
Vincent


Subject  :  Re:Let's talk about
Author  :  R. John Howe mailto:%20rjhowe@erols.com
Date  :  04-21-2001 on 06:48 a.m.
Vincent -

While I'm glad you put these two backs up and while I was willing to "play the game" so to speak, notice that this is not the ground on which "weave pattern" is used.

Like "handle" weave pattern is used in a situation in which you usually also have quite a bit of other information about the rug. Usually, but not in this discussion one actually has the piece in one's hands. So Neff and Maggs might be able to argue that your test here is not a fair one.

One response, though, it that if these two pieces were woven at some distance from one another and perhaps by weavers with different tribal backgounds, then the similarity of their weave pattern (if others agree that there is such) puts great pressure on any notion that weave pattern can be used in isolation. It may not be quite as simple as recognizing ones children (although that act is still an impressive one for me and telling in this discussion).

Regards,

R. John Howe


Subject  :  Re:Let's talk about
Author  :  Steve Price mailto:%20sprice@hsc.vcu.edu
Date  :  04-21-2001 on 08:43 a.m.
Hi John,

The notion that one ought to be able to handle the rug itself, not just look at a picture, is time-honored and unassailable (in my opinion). But no book of which I'm aware includes the rugs (an idea for a best-selling rug book if we can figure out a way to make money on it!), and the discussion so far has been pushing for publishing the backs of rugs - in picture form.

Steve Price


Subject  :  Re:Let's talk about
Author  :  Vincent Keers mailto:%20vkeers@worldonline.nl
Date  :  04-21-2001 on 06:17 p.m.
Dear John,

First I have to say that I admire your frank and openminded aproach. No reserves, just act as you think is well and upright. It seems not a lot of competition around.

Think it's very hard to tell what we are looking at in the image. It's very easy in reall life though.
If one sees the whole rug back it's more easy, but then the image has to be as big as 16m2 to see the warp despression.
It's the combination of impressions that makes the picture complete.
Left is: Gendje, 1900. It's in a terrible condition. The back is partly glued, and I think a dog or a cat, rabbit etc. used it to. The hairs are woven in on every millimeter.
Right is: Pakiafghanazak. Afghan refugee production from Pakistan: 2000

So the test wasn't a cliffhanger.
It shows that it's the combination of impressions and the capacity to rule out 90% of possibilities to get to the 10% of wich is 90% besides the point. And then, at the end it's possible the shoulders are pulled up and it's: An Armenian production. A Jewish production. It's a Teheran, a Bebehan etc.

Best regards,
Vincent


Subject  :  Re:Let's talk about
Author  :  R. John Howe mailto:%20rjhowe@erols.com
Date  :  04-22-2001 on 05:13 a.m.
Dear folks -

Steve Price writes above:

"The notion that one ought to be able to handle the rug itself, not just look at a picture, is time-honored and unassailable (in my opinion). But no book of which I'm aware includes the rugs (an idea for a best-selling rug book if we can figure out a way to make money on it!), and the discussion so far has been pushing for publishing the backs of rugs - in picture form."

My thought:

While it is true that one item of evidence that would indicate that the Neff and Maggs "gestalt" perspective is seen to have real advantage would be the appearance of life-size rug back photos as part of the information in rug books, that is not the only or even primary way in which this perspective has been and would be used, if one took Neff and Maggs' advice.

As I see it, one would also incorporate this perspective explicitly into one's "hands on" examination of weavings and, in truth, on that ground I think many of us do already follow the Neff and Maggs lead, although perhaps not as self-consciously as they would advise.

I just wanted to suggest that the salon topic is in fact a bit broader than arguing for the inclusion of the images of rug backs in rug books. That's part but not all of what I think Neff and Maggs advise.

And while I see some resemblance between the way the Neff and Maggs "look" at rug backs and the noton of "handle" are employed, I think that the fact that no one has (yet) produced a rug book with swatches does not diminish the force of their recommendations for me at all.

But Steve was likely not suggesting that. He was more probably mostly joking about this latter possibility. "Scratch and sniff" moved in a new direction. In the "new economy" one has to be thinking every minute.

Regards,

R. John Howe


Subject  :  Re:Let's talk about
Author  :  Patrick Weiler mailto:%20theweilers@home.com
Date  :  04-22-2001 on 02:53 p.m.
Vincent,

This is an enjoyable exercise. I would have guessed old Bergama and new Ersari. As John says, we do need more than just a comparison photo of two small areas of the backs to make a reasoned guess.

I have not read the Neff and Maggs book, but with the brief description in the Salon, there appear to be some inherent problems with the "theory".
Neff and Maggs "theory" is a method of differentiation, but one that is very difficult to quantify. The sheer numbers of weaving villages and tribes, along with the third chronological dimension of differences in weave pattern over time (consider Tekke weaving) combine to complicate the seeming simplicity of the "theory" beyond a reasonable ability to grasp it comprehensively.

The traditional method of breaking a complex issue (such as rugs) into component parts, identifying and categorizing them, to better understand the whole, is more suitable to a method championed by Marla Mallett and others who "microscopically" study them. The factor of "weave pattern" is really just the Big Picture assembled from their Little Pictures. This Big Picture can be grasped fairly readily when the weaving is turned over to reveal the broader weave pattern, but the broader weave pattern is itself constructed from the framework that is only better understood by a more careful, close examination.

Granted, more experienced experts can quite easily distinguish one rug from another by a peek at the back, but this Peak Ability comes from previous, more careful and closer study of many similar examples. This allows a ready ability to distinguish otherwise similar rugs at a glance.

The recent book Tribal Rugs by Brian MacDonald includes many, but unfortunately small, photos of the backs of the weavings. This is helpful, but not helpful enough for an interested person to compare one particular example with, say, a half -dozen similar examples, nor with a close enough photo to truly show the structural details.
This leads, then, to the frustrations and limitations of the cost of publishing full color, quality photographs.
Which leads to a suggestion:
Should an author publish a really nice book of weavings (say Kurdish or Hamadan for example) and have a directly related web site with comparable examples, detailed structural photographs and structural analysis, close-ups and bibliographic references all tied to the plate numbers in the book? Would you pay a little bit more?

Comparatively yours,

Patrick Weiler


Subject  :  Re:Let's talk about
Author  :  R. John Howe mailto:%20rjhowe@erols.com
Date  :  04-22-2001 on 07:11 p.m.
Hi Pat -

Useful stuff in your post here.

First, I do think that Neff and Maggs are arguing that "weave pattern" is more, when viewed at its own level, than the sum of the parts that comprise close-grained technical description. That's why I think Wendel's analogy to how we recognize friends and family members is so powerful. It is the fact that the "synthesis" is different from the addition of all the individual factors.

That's not to say that errors cannot be made while using "weave pattern." We are demonstrating ourselves (although most of us have not be driving our skills much at this level) that we can't do it very well.

Thanks, too for mentioning Brian MacDonald's book on tribal rugs as one other that does show rug backs.

And funny you should mention some other strategies beside books in which more detailed information about rugs might be made available without undue cost.

One of the sets of folks who are providing weavings for the hotel exhibitions in the 2003 ICOC are going to publish a book but have perhaps 700-800 pieces of very high quality in their universe. They plan to do some of them in the book but then to put the others that they can't fit in on a CD ROM so that this additional information can be distributed without undue cost.

Perhaps weave pattern might be economically included in instances in the future in which a CD ROM is to be an element of the distribution strategy.

Regards,

R. John Howe


Subject  :  Re:Let's talk about
Author  :  Jerry Silverman mailto:%20rug_books@silvrmn.com
Date  :  04-23-2001 on 01:37 a.m.
A plan under discussion for ACOR IV in Indianapolis in April, 2002, considers distributing a CD-ROM of the rugs in the exhibition of local collectors' rugs - instead of incurring the prohibitive cost of producing a printed catalog. This way the effort in assembling the exhibition doesn't evaporate at the end, leaving only glimmers in the memories of the attendees. Including pictures of the backs is beginning to sound like a good idea, too.

Cordially,

-Jerry-


Subject  :  Re:Let's talk about
Author  :  Marvin Amstey mailto:%20mamstey1@rochester.rr.com
Date  :  04-23-2001 on 08:16 a.m.
Dear Jerry,
I appreciate the cost restraint, but a good book should recover its costs - may take a year or two - but the printed photos (with or withour backs), done on good paper by a quality operation is still superior to a CD-ROM or a computer image of the rug. The latter is useful only for design unless you're looking to give some direct scans of each piece, some over the surface, long depth-of-field views of each rug, etc. If i had a vote, it would be for a quality catalogue.
Best regards,
Marvin

Subject  :  Re:Let's talk about
Author  :  Steve Price mailto:%20sprice@hsc.vcu.edu
Date  :  04-23-2001 on 09:27 a.m.
Dear Marvin,

I agree that a well-produced book is better than a CD, but a CD is better than nothing. In any case, the two are not mutually exclusive, and perhaps we will see catalogs in both formats for rug exhibitions. There are several encyclopedias in CD format, and National Geographic is avaiable that way, too. The advantages it offers are low cost, little demand for storage space, and very easy searching.

Steve Price


Subject  :  Re:Let's talk about
Author  :  R. John Howe mailto:%20rjhowe@erols.com
Date  :  04-23-2001 on 09:41 a.m.
Hi Steve -

I too have the National Georgraphic on CD-ROM and in fact bought it largely on the basis of your recommendation.

My experience with it suggests that we should revise our description of the search feature as "very easy." My experience with it would be better described as "very frustrating." The key words as I think you spotted early too, do not function very well and I find the moves in searching between discs infuriating.

Not a reason for not going this route though. You can put out a great deal of information on CD-ROM at a very low cost and search features will get better.

Regards,

R. John Howe


Subject  :  Re:Let's talk about
Author  :  Wendel Swan mailto:%20wdswan@erols.com
Date  :  04-23-2001 on 11:39 a.m.
Dear Marvin, Jerry, Steve, John and all,

The cost of printing a catalog will depend, of course, on its size, the number of plates and the size of the run. In the rug world, a softcover publication is apt to cost a minimum of about $20 a copy and it is hard to justify printing less than 1,000.

Recovering $20,000 may sound easy, but there are many volumes available for a limited market. Add in the costs of distribution and sales and you can see that trying to recover costs on even a modest publication can be difficult. What happens if the costs rise to $40,000 or more?

Like Marvin, I prefer paper (I don't have any reference works on CD yet) but I would rather have a CD than nothing.

Whether the catalog is paper or electronic, proper photography is essential. It will not be an inconsequential task for ACOR to undertake. I've been involved with the ICOC publications enough to understand just how much work there is and how tough it is to sell any volume of books.

Wendel


Subject  :  Re:Let's talk about
Author  :  Steve Price mailto:%20sprice@hsc.vcu.edu
Date  :  04-23-2001 on 12:50 p.m.
Dear John,

The fact that the search utility in the CD version of National Geographic is buggy as hell doesn't alter the fact that a CD can (and usually does) have a search utility that makes it very much easier to find stuff than a book does. The flip side of the same coin would be to assert that photographic reproduction in books is poor because (fill in the name of any book with lousy photos here) has lousy reproduction of photos.

Steve Price


Subject  :  Re:Let's talk about
Author  :  R. John Howe mailto:%20rjhowe@erols.com
Date  :  04-23-2001 on 10:03 p.m.
Steve -

I agree, although we have been unsuccesful using the key word "collie" to find some items we know are in the National Georgraphic because we have the issues.

But look here! While we're just talking about it, others are doing it.

Editor's Note: Link to an eBay URL offering a CD showing images of rugs was here, and has been deleted

Regards,

R. John Howe


Subject  :  Re:Let' talk about
Author  :  Wendel Swan mailto:%20wdswan@erols.com
Date  :  04-23-2001 on 11:38 p.m.
John,

You should have searched that CD of "antique" rugs for your collies. Lots of dogs there.

Wendel


Subject  :  Re:Let's talk about
Author  :  R. John Howe mailto:%20rjhowe@erols.com
Date  :  04-24-2001 on 06:26 p.m.
Wendel -

Yes, pretty awful, aren't they? Too bad we didn't find it when some of us wanted to put up ugly, ugly rugs.

Of course, we were talking about the mode of distribution of images and this shows that, as with books, junk is likely to predominate.

But fire and water can be abused and we still find them useful.

Regards,

R. John Howe


Powered by UltraBoard 2000 <http://www.ub2k.com/>